derive: some clean-ups and optimizations #260
Conversation
Kijewski
force-pushed
the
pr-stuff-in-derive
branch
from
d3e63b3
to
a4e6f66
Compare
| Some((ident, PartialTemplateArgsSource::InDoc(_))) => { | ||
| source_from_docs(&ident, &args.meta_docs, ast)? | ||
| Some(PartialTemplateArgsSource::InDoc(s)) => { | ||
| source_from_docs(s.span(), &args.meta_docs, ast)? |
| @@ -7,10 +7,10 @@ error: unknown node `fail` | |||
| | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | |||
|
|
|||
| error: when using `in_doc = true`, the struct's documentation needs a `rinja` code block | |||
| --> tests/ui/rinja-block.rs:15:25 | |||
| --> tests/ui/rinja-block.rs:15:34 | |||
| | | |||
| 15 | #[template(ext = "txt", in_doc = true)] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't it underline the whole in_doc = true?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In the other cases we also only underline the value part, the part after the equals sign. I actually came to like that, because the problem is with the value, not with the key. If you write in_doc = false, then everything is fine (except that in here there is not source).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmmmmmmm. Then the message needs to be reworded a bit to make it obvious that the value is the value. Like:
when using
in_docwith thetruevalue, the struct's documentation needs arinjacode block
Or something like that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I changed the message a bit. Do you think it's more clear now?
|
Apart from my one comment, looks all good to me, thanks! Please feel free to merge even without fixing my comment (but if you do, please open an issue so we don't forget about it and I'd love to fix it 😄 ). |
Kijewski
force-pushed
the
pr-stuff-in-derive
branch
from
a4e6f66
to
b291e1a
Compare
Minor changes extracted from the
enumimplementation. Please see the individual commits.